It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
It is up to the producers to show everyone that is the case, by delivering a world beating film on time that proves it. No more navel gazing about the old ways being best. No more questioning Bond's relevance in a digital and high tech age. No more making jokes about the gadgets and martinis. Embrace it all.
Show everyone why he's the best. Shut them all up with the product you deliver.
The time is right for a celebration of all that's Bond. I believe it is that moment once more.
I don't think he even could without getting in trouble with the Director's Guild. Not sure if the "Eastwood Rule" applies in the UK, though.
I liked SF and SP, so sucks for you.
I agree with most of this...2 years between each is the way it should be,3 maximum.
Over Craig? You know, I actually would tbh.
I'm glad you can be content and celebrate disappointing Bond films. Hopefully I can fully enjoy a Bond film after what's been a decade so far.
I can see it now
Daniel Craig is Ian Fleming’s James Bond 007 in Martha
Yep,i could go for that.
there's an interview with Roger Michell or whatever his name is saying EON wanted QOS to come out in 2007. sounds far fetched but that's what he says
Barbara loves Craig and people who don't like Craig blame her for it.
That and sexism. MGW doesn't take nearly the abuse on these boards as she does, and as far as we know, they are equal partners. Certainly he's been involved longer and has his children involved in the films as well.
years.
Not sure about those working in or close to the industry having a better stance; anyone could have opined their abstract thoughts on numerous possibilities but what you were asking to me seemed somewhat specific.
And his job really isn't that hard at the end of the day. You're not really even acting when you're James Bond (imo). I mean sure he does have to act, but he's largely just playing himself. The worst parts are the stunts, and with today's CGI it's not necessary to have an actor always doing stunts himself. It's not like it was back in the day when stunt doubles were obvious.
I used to be a Craig fan but his mood and overextended hand in the franchise - often for the worse - has made me dislike him. That and the fact he really just doesn't look like Bond anymore.
The sooner he gets the boot, the better.
Boo
It's fun to speculate, not so fun to read through all the rubbish and rumors of some of these ill informed "articles" that have come out, just for the clicks.
Thank you, but I'm still not sure why so many people here assume Fallout made them reconsider things. Fallout made 183 million USD in 26 days in the US. During the first 26 days of its release, Skyfall earned 248 million USD in the US, and Bond movies are way more successful outside the US, than Mission Impossible movies are.
I knew sooner or later someone here would argue that people criticizing Barbara Broccoli are sexist. The reason I singled her out is that she is the one running the show. Not Michael G Wilson. Not Daniel Craig. I have absolutely no problem with competent women holding power within the Bond franchise behind the scenes. For example, I am all for the great Kathryn Bigelow directing a Bond movie.
Cavill is Superman and Napoleon Solo and he also stars in MI FALLOUT.
Box office isn't everything. The first three Bourne films were successful but weren't exactly financial behemoths - yet look at the legacy they left behind.
This panic over FALLOUT is nonsense.
I hope none of this happened because of Fallout. There is no way they can match Cruise on the same terms. They shouldn't even try. However, they are missing something I feel. They need a dynamic energy. Boyle brought some of it with his zany brand, but not enough, I feel.
1. It was Craig's idea to hire Mendes, and it was Craig who convinced him to accept the job.
2. They got one extra year to polish the script because of a delay that had nothing to do with Barbara Broccoli. I don't even want to think about how much worse Skyfall would have been without that delay.
Its from a creative perspective. The action, fights, the story, the intensity and tension. All things lacking and coming up short in recent Bond films.
And how many Bond films prior to SF performed the same? It took SP nearly half a year to touch $200M domestic.
All in all Fallout has proven to be a far more engaging and enjoyable experience than Bond's recent output and EoN would be remiss to ignore the bar MI has set.
And it was Barbara's idea to hire Craig. Swings and roundabouts. She's made mistakes of course and there are many things that can be done better. There always are. But the suggestion that she's utterly clueless is, ironically, clueless.
What is it that you're actually suggesting as a solution to the problem? Who, if not Barbara, should take charge?
+1